-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Steve Langasek wrote: | Which parts of freeswan link against libdes? According to | /usr/share/doc/freeswan/copyright, some parts are LGPL. Do we know for | sure that libdes+GPL is happening? No, not for sure. However, since the copyright situation is difficult, having many different copyright owners, I would assume so.... I have forwarded your mail to my recent upstream contact. Hopefully he will know better.
| Also, since freeswan uses libdes internally (it does not appear to use | libssl), if there is a GPL violation here, it is a violation whether or | not the binaries are in main. Yes. | If he can't release a new version with a changed license because of his | contract, then what legal force does his email to freeswan upstream have? | Perhaps he "doesn't care" about the advertising clause, but this is not | the same thing as waiving the clause. Yes, I had the same feeling about the email (that's the reason for asking here for advice...). In fact, I don't think that his email has any legal force. | What is needed here is a license exemption from the freeswan copyright | holders, granting permission to distribute binaries linked against | libdes. Is this enough ? Because of the advertising clause, would Debian be forced to include such an advertisment in any release document ? best regards, Rene -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAj1/uskACgkQq7SPDcPCS96HiwCgkALtrPag49CgpjGJBtzGHk2B w/IAnjzRi6llrRGPAUARhBzjLP8DHEdH =ASdx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
